Reliable contraception is the surest way to prevent unintended pregnancy. The expense associated with pregnancy, birth, and then the whole panoply of health care consumed by children is much greater than the cost of birth control. If insurance companies provided a steady source of reliable contraceptives, they would definitely see a net gain to their bottom line. I fail to understand why they do not do so. I have even been in plans where abortion was covered but not birth control -- there is no logic in that whatsoever.

yes if they did they would

Yes if insurance companies were to offer contraceptives then they would save a lot of money. A lot of people get pregnant because they go for a cheap way of contraceptive that have more rates of failing. If they were to give good contraceptives away a lot of people would not have accidental pregnancies, and thus insurance companies would save a lot more people. Because in the end pregnancy is more expensive then contraceptives.

Yes, contraceptives are expensive and many insurances don't cover them.

From a background of working in pharmaceutical insurance processing, I was amazed when I found out how few insurance plans cover contraception, yet most of them cover Viagra or Cialis.

Birth control is expensive. Throughout the course of my job, I talked to many women who were not able to afford birth control, or who were forced to change birth control due to their insurance only covering one specific kind.

Not only would insurances potentially save money from reducing unexpected pregnancy, but also for those who have to take contraception for the purpose of controlling ovarian/uterine cysts, endometriosis, etc. Controlling those health problems with birth control would greatly reduce the risk of surgery and complications, which would cost far more than contraception.

Yes I believe they would save money. The long term savings would definitely benefit them.

Giving away contraceptives would be a great money saver for insurance companies cause it would cut down on the number of unplanned or unwanted pregnancies. With fewer pregnancies, the cost of having to cover the expenses after deductibles would be greatly reduced and could possibly lower the cost of insurance coverage in the long run.

No. Probably not.

Birth control is ALREADY cheap and easily available and it is at best unclear that forced universal coverage will save anything and more likely that it WILL COST MORE. For more information please check factcheck . Org / 2012 / 02 / cloudy-contraception-costs / Most of the studies that show cost savings make incredibly unrealistic assumptions in my opinion. An opinion shared by most actuaries, most health care insurance companies, most healthcare economists, but not unsurprisingly shared by some policy economists and public healthcare studies. These studies show that if you increased their funding by hundreds of millions and follow their policy prescriptions we would save a billion. By some of the same organizations and "experts" that brought you medicaid and medicare at over TEN times their original predicted costs. Confirmation bias and conflicts of interest abound ON BOTH SIDES. ﻿

No. Probably not.

Birth control is ALREADY cheap and easily available and it is at best unclear that forced universal coverage will save anything and more likely that it WILL COST MORE. For more information please check factcheck . Org / 2012 / 02 / cloudy-contraception-costs / Most of the studies that show cost savings make incredibly unrealistic assumptions in my opinion. An opinion shared by most actuaries, most health care insurance companies, most healthcare economists, but not unsurprisingly shared by some policy economists and public healthcare studies. These studies show that if you increased their funding by hundreds of millions and follow their policy prescriptions we would save a billion. By some of the same organizations and "experts" that brought you medicaid and medicare at over TEN times their original predicted costs. Confirmation bias and conflicts of interest abound ON BOTH SIDES. ﻿